Regime Types Flashcards
(26 cards)
What are three elements of the separation of powers?
Separation of origin, survival and personnel.
Name three examples of presidential systems.
USA, South Korea, Argentina
Name three examples of parliamentary systems.
UK, Japan, Italy
Name three examples of semi-presidential systems.
France, Austria, Finland
How does separation of powers relate to the presidential/parliamentary distinction?
In a presidential system, there is separation of origin, survival and personnel. In a parliamentary system, there is a fusion of these elements. Mutual independence/dependence between the executive and legislature.
Who wrote that the USA has ‘separate institutions sharing powers’?
Richard Neustadt
Belgium and the UK both have parliamentary systems. What is the difference in balance of power between executive and legislative? (Lijphart)
Belgium has a mainly balanced relationship, while the UK has clear executive dominance.
What is a unique feature of semi-presidential systems?
Cohabitation- where the president is from a different party to the government that controls the legislature.
How did Alan Siaroff carry out his research on semi-presidentialism and presidentialism? (2003)
He used a series of questions to divide democracies with a president into eight categories. Then he measured presidential power in each of these categories.
What results did Alan Siaroff obtain about semi-presidentialism and presidentialism?
Siaoff found that presidency (Type 2) was the most coherent category and also that movement towards parliamentarianism implied weaker presidential power. However, he found incoherency in the semi-presidential (Type 5) category which had the largest standard deviation at 1.92 and argued that this category can be divided into three.
What typology of 5 did Siaroff suggest should replace the standard three regime types?
‘presidential systems, parliamentary systems with presidential dominance, parliamentary systems with a presidential corrective, parliamentary systems with figurehead presidents… and parliamentary systems with figurehead monarchs’
What did Oda van Cranenburgh conclude when she measured 30 African countries using Siaroff’s typology? (2008)
She concluded counterintuitively that semi-presidential systems implied greater presidential power and was actually the most coherent category. In the semi-presidential system, many African presidents possess additional powers such as appointing and chairing cabinet meetings. She supports Siaroff’s conclusion that regime types tell us little about presidential power.
How did Jose Cheibub test the validity of the traditional distinction?
Using the comprehensive Comparative Constitutions Project database, Cheibub set out to establish whether democracies from one category were more institutionally similar than compared to democracies outside of their category.
What did Jose Cheibub conclude about the traditional three regime types?
Cheibub concluded that most systems were ‘hybrids’ and that the power of the executive and legislature was almost in no way derived from its regime type.
What is the distinction between ‘presidential-parliamentary and premier-presidential’ semi-presidential systems?
President-parliamentary: the government is responsible to the legislature and the president (France).
Premier-presidential: the government is responsible to the legislature but not the president.
What are alternative explanations of variations in presidential power? (Chaisty, Cheeseman and Power, 2014)
They found that the ability of presidents to form coalitions was determined by the ‘presidential toolbox’ which comprised five tools: ‘agenda power, budgetary authority, cabinet management, partisan powers, and informal institutions’. E.g. presidential decree power might make a large difference.
What is the distinction between dispositional and relational properties? (Robert Elgie)
A dispositional property is one which relates to the structure of something, separate from any interaction with the environment. For example, whether a president is directly elected would be dispositional. A relational property is dependent upon interaction with the environment. For example, whether a president can dissolve parliament is a relational property, because it requires a particular circumstance to take place. The dispositional factors provide a framework within which relational properties determine the actual exercise of power.
What are the concerns that Linz raises about presidentialism?
i) The zero-sum winner takes all nature.
ii) The lack of a non-partisan, symbolic head of state.
iii) The difficulty in resolving disputes between the president and legislature, both who claim legitimacy.
iv) The term limits can frustrate an ambitious leader.
What does Cheibub argue is more important for stability than regime type?
Historical factors- e.g. the historical legacy of authoritarianism in Latin America has created a ‘military-presidential nexus’.
How does Daniel Horowitz challenge Linz?
Donald Horowitz contests Linz findings with the examples of Sri Lanka and Nigeria. He argues that Linz’s quarrel is not with presidency but with plurality elections and adversary politics. It is easy to turn his arguments around towards parliamentarism. He is not in favour of parliamentary systems, but parliamentary coalitions.
Stepan and Skach (1993) examined 75 countries, what was their finding about the frequency of regime breakdown in presidential and parliamentary elections?
Democracy survived 61% of the time in parliamentary systems, compared to only 20% of the time in presidential ones.
Cheibub and Limongi (2001) examined democracies between 1950 and 1990. What were the expected life of parliamentary and presidential democracies?
The expected life of a parliamentary democracy was 73 years compared to an expected life of 21 years for a presidential system.
What did Preworski et all (2000) discover that supports Linz’s argument about dual legitimacy?
Przeworski et al (2000) found that when a president’s party has between one third and half of the seats in the legislature, the probability of collapse increases, and the presidential regime becomes particularly vulnerable because the president can veto legislation passed in parliament and the situation can lead to a political impasse.
What is the situation with agenda setting in parliamentary and presidential systems (according to Tsebelis)?
With respect to financial bills, the initiative belongs to executive in both systems. However, with respect to non-financial bills, in a parliamentary system, the government makes a proposal to the parliament to accept or reject, whereas in presidential systems, the parliament makes the proposal to the executive to accept or reject. The roles of agenda setting are reversed in each system.
